At the November HPPOA Board of Directors meeting, Lanell Lua, Chair of the HPPOA Cultural Preservation Committee and HPPOA board member, requested that the board members approve and act upon the recommendations on page 116 (page 126 of pdf) in ASM Affiliates’ “Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of 31 Acres” dated September 2024, beginning with “Recommendations for Immediate Actions,” as follows:

“It is recommended that the HPPOA Board acknowledge the important cultural value of the features documented within the current study area, and commit to the protection and conservation of the entire 31-acre study area until long-term plans for the parcels have been developed.”

It is further recommended that the HPPOA Board, as stated in the report (1. and 1a.)
1) Provide the SHPD with a copy of this study and

2) request assistance with obtaining an SIHP (State Inventory of Historic Places) site designation for the site area.

Board member Alissa Hanshew asked what’s involved and what the implications are to the site being added to the State Inventory of Historic Places (SIHP). Board president Kari Hoffman asked for clarification and specifics regarding the phrase “commit to the protection and conservation of the entire 31-acre study area.” She said that she has “no problem saying that we will do everything in our power to keep it protected, but I don’t want to make a commitment that we’re going to be putting money out there for its protection.”

The Board tabled the issue to the December meeting, so that those questions could be responded to with specifics.

At the December HPPOA board meeting, Lanell Lua, Chair of the HPPOA Cultural Preservation Committee and HPPOA Board member, presented a detailed written response to those questions (which was reviewed and approved at the December Cultural Preservation Committee meeting). Each board member received a copy.

In answer to Hanshew’s question regarding the site being added to the State Inventory of Historic Places (SIHP):

Information from the State Historic Preservation’s website is included in the Board’s packet.

• It is a simple process to apply for the site to be added to the SIHP and there is no fee.
• It is an official listing of the site.
• The land is already protected from development because the site was documented in ASM Affiliates’ archaeological reconnaissance survey report, which was submitted to SHPD (State Historic Preservation Division).
• There may be tax benefits which can be applied for (as referenced on the SIHP website).

Matt Clark, principal investigator, for ASM Affiliates, has offered to assist the board with the process of applying for the SIHP. (The four steps were listed.)

In response to Hoffman’s request for clarification and specifics regarding the phrase “commit to the protection and conservation of the entire 31-acre study area.” (She said that she has “no problem saying that we will do everything in our power to keep it protected, but I don’t want to make a commitment that we’re going to be putting money out there for its protection.”):

In consultation with Matt Clark, it was determined that the HPPOA board does not have to commit to any costs in order to commit to the protection and conservation of the entire 31-acre study area and carry out the recommendations in ASM’s report, as long as the board enters into an agreement with an NHO (Native Hawaiian nonprofit organization) to steward the land. The NHO would bear the costs through grants and fundraising.

Lanell presented this information at the meeting and said that any questions could be answered by Matt Clark, lead investigator of the archaeological study. Hoffman objected because Clark was not on the agenda, even though the issue of recommendations was on the agenda. After much discussion and confusion about the recommendations, Hoffman requested that a special meeting be scheduled with Matt Clark so “that we can, the Board can, and anyone who wants to attend, can ask questions about the study.” Vice President Jeff Finley added that he wanted copies of all four pages of recommendations provided to each board member before that meeting and that he “would like to interview the archaeologist in terms of, not every finding is necessarily something that needs to be preserved and we’re just kind of doing a word of mouth that the entire 31 acres has to be preserved and taken off limits and I’m very unclear on that point. I think there’s other uses that can be made of this land…”

The Board unanimously passed a motion to follow recommendation #1: Provide the SHPD with a copy of this study.

After the meeting, Hoffman asked Lanell to schedule the special meeting with Matt Clark after her return from vacation on January 20.